The main difference is that this translation from The Bible Society in Israel is in Modern Hebrew, whereas Delitzsch's translation is in a form of ancient Hebrew. I'm not sure to what extent he drew on early rabbinic sources such as the Mishnah. These translations also sometimes handle OT quotations quite differently. The Modern HNT uses the text of the Leningrad Codex even sometimes when the NT author doesn't follow it word for word, whereas Delitzsch attempts to translate it regardless (e.g., in cases such as indirect quotations, summarizing, paraphrasing, textual variants, and/or quoting or alluding to more than one text, etc.).

The main difference is that this translation from The Bible Society in Israel is in Modern Hebrew, whereas Delitzsch's translation is in a form of ancient Hebrew.

Thanks for the explanation! Sounds like there is enough difference to warrant both being available if Faithlife is willing to produce it. If I can ask, what sorts of things do people use the Hebrew New Testament for?

The main difference is that this translation from The Bible Society in Israel is in Modern Hebrew, whereas Delitzsch's translation is in a form of ancient Hebrew.

Thanks for the explanation! Sounds like there is enough difference to warrant both being available if Faithlife is willing to produce it. If I can ask, what sorts of things do people use the Hebrew New Testament for?

Hi Matthew,

Personally, I've been using the Modern HNT simply to enrich my Hebrew studies and have more material to read and listen to, especially while studying Scripture. I'd largely use Delitzsch's translation for that same end. This would apply to learning any language!

Secondarily, it's also interesting to see what connections you make between the original, Hebrew-Aramaic OT Scriptures and a Hebrew NT translation, since they share not just similar ideas (conceptual content) but often similar language (linguistic form), although it's always important to keep in mind authorial intent and whether those connections would be (textually and contextually) accessible and warranted to their intended audience (from the author-intended text and the author-assumed context). This is somewhat similar to the connections one can make between the original, Koine Greek NT Scriptures and ancient, Koine Greek translations of the Hebrew-Aramaic OT Scriptures, although ancient Greek translations have other values for their antiquity (e.g., in the study of linguistics, textual criticism, history, culture, etc.).

Finally, there are also discussions about the languages spoken during Jesus' time and how those relate to the Gospels, parables, the broader historical-cultural setting, and other issues, although I'm sure there's often a lot of speculation and conjecture in some of these areas (and misconceptions about the status of Hebrew and Aramaic). That's not really my major area of study, so as Randall Buth stated in one of the discussion threads I provided (here):

Randall Buth:

Delitzsch is always worth checking to see what he did with something since he put in a lot of homework on his translations.

For best use, this must be read against a full background of mishnaic and Second-Temple literary Hebrew (Late Biblical+Qumran).

I hope this helps gives some ideas on how this resource might be useful!

Essentially, Delitzsch's translation along with the Peshitta (already published by Logos fully formatted) is useful for studying how Jesus may have originally worded his conversations. I've found the pdf format listed in the link at the beginning of the thread to be very difficult to navigate, unlike Logos formatted books. I end up going back to my paper copy.

I made this book for Logos, and is being tested. If no errors are detected, will publish in this forum.

Thank you, Samuel! I'm sure many will be grateful for you sharing your work. Be sure to publish it in the "Files" forum, and then we can link to it in this or any other related threads. I hope all goes well!